APS Lucy Calkins- how does this happen?

[Anonymous]

Not everything we learn is super engaging or fun. Sometimes learning new things can feel boring. Seems pretty normal. In Asian countries do they make everything super exciting and engaging? When I see photos of classrooms in China they’re usually packed with kids sitting in rows and it looks more teacher centered than student centered. Yet they seem to do better academically.... Maybe they have more respect and better attention spans than most American kids? I really don’t know. Am curious.

Article: “Your kids bored at school? Tell them to get over it.”
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article90271002.html

Someone here says “it can’t always be fun. That’s unrealistic for you and for them.” But thanks for putting pressure on teachers to not only teach your kids but to also entertain your kids.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Teachers/comments/406qbb/the_pressure_to_always_have_an_engaging_lesson/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body

Bored second graders and a teacher that must use a boring curriculum but attempts to make it more interesting, yet the kids still whine it’s boring...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Teachers/comments/64aacj/students_complaining_about_being_bored_2nd_grade/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body

This teacher isn’t sorry chemistry made one student so bored they just had to tell their teacher they’re too boring. How polite. https://www.reddit.com/r/Teachers/comments/alxgju/this_class_is_boringi_just_wanted_to_let_you_know/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not everything we learn is super engaging or fun. Sometimes learning new things can feel boring. Seems pretty normal. In Asian countries do they make everything super exciting and engaging? When I see photos of classrooms in China they’re usually packed with kids sitting in rows and it looks more teacher centered than student centered. Yet they seem to do better academically.... Maybe they have more respect and better attention spans than most American kids? I really don’t know. Am curious.

Article: “Your kids bored at school? Tell them to get over it.”
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article90271002.html

Someone here says “it can’t always be fun. That’s unrealistic for you and for them.” But thanks for putting pressure on teachers to not only teach your kids but to also entertain your kids.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Teachers/comments/406qbb/the_pressure_to_always_have_an_engaging_lesson/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body

Bored second graders and a teacher that must use a boring curriculum but attempts to make it more interesting, yet the kids still whine it’s boring...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Teachers/comments/64aacj/students_complaining_about_being_bored_2nd_grade/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body

This teacher isn’t sorry chemistry made one student so bored they just had to tell their teacher they’re too boring. How polite. https://www.reddit.com/r/Teachers/comments/alxgju/this_class_is_boringi_just_wanted_to_let_you_know/

The thing is, learning knowledge is not boring. Administrators somehow got that into their heads, but it’s the opposite. Learning strategies is boring. Learning the same thing over and over is boring. Not getting to learn anything new is boring. Not being challenged is boring.

When kids are busy learning new skills and rich stories from history and science and doing hands-on experiments, they are hardly ever bored .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please read “The Knowledge Gap” by Natalie Wexler. Lucy Calkins is HORRIBLE. I can’t believe teachers go along with this.

Omg don’t blame the curriculum a whole district buys and says teachers have to use on the teachers. How much say do you have over how your leadership tells you to do elements of your job?

I’m a nurse and you’d better believe that if my coworkers and I were instructed to do things that consistently led to bad outcomes, we would speak up and demand change.

WTH?? You’re ok with accepting the failing state of education? I seriously have to question your integrity if you’re ok with continuing to operate this way. Jesus.

Calm down Drama Queen. The problem is this is also what’s taught in teaching programs. It’s been reading instruction for a LONG time. A lot of teachers honestly don’t know it’s not “the best” way to teach reading. I don’t teach elementary but you can also stop acting like teachers are killing children by using curriculum they learned on and are told to use by their district. By all means go lobby the district to abandon it and tell them what reading program you prefer.(you don’t know any.)

I don’t know which is worse, knowing the curriculum you follow is terrible yet choosing not to speak up, or being completely unaware that the curriculum is terrible in the first place. It means you’re either lazy or stupid.

Yes, there are many better options for the chosen curriculum. Many posters have linked specific examples. Children need to be taught to decode. Spelling, phonics, and grammar instruction are critical. A curriculum focused on building knowledge, rather than general comprehension strategies, is much more effective.

How do I, as a nurse, understand this better than you?!

The Calkins curriculum is not terrible. It works wonders for many students in helping them to think deeply and comprehend at advanced levels (granted, I’ve only taught Calkins in upper elementary grades). In the lower grades, it needs to be coupled with phonics instruction. A phonics only curriculum would bore the early readers to tears. My kids’ K-1 teachers (ACPS) did a good job balancing Calkins with phonics instruction. The dramatics of calling the curriculum “terrible” don’t help. What we had before (NO language arts curriculum for my first 12 years of teaching) was much worse. Each teacher had to create her own lessons based on the standards.—Fine, if you had an outstanding teacher, but not great in many cases.

THIS is the problem. We have educators that don’t understand how awful the LC curriculum is.

“It works wonders!” Um, why are kids so grossly underprepared for middle and high school then? Why are test scores getting worse and worse?

The only kids that are doing well are those that come from privileged homes. This is because their parents make sure they have the basic knowledge they need (they supplement at home or hire tutors). Not everyone can do this.

THIS is why the solution isn’t just handing more money over. When our “educators” don’t even understand the problem, we are in deep trouble.

Maybe the problem is not the curriculum, but that living in poverty makes academic success very difficult, regardless of the curriculum.

That's what research tells us, anyway, although it's ignored by everyone because it's much easier to blame schools for a problem they didn't cause than it is to address the real cause - poverty and inequity.

Also what my personal experience teaching for 30 years tells me.

Not true. Living in poverty is a factor of course but developing countries have managed to provide a better education to kids from low income families than in the US. There is something wrong with the curriculum here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please read “The Knowledge Gap” by Natalie Wexler. Lucy Calkins is HORRIBLE. I can’t believe teachers go along with this.

Omg don’t blame the curriculum a whole district buys and says teachers have to use on the teachers. How much say do you have over how your leadership tells you to do elements of your job?

I’m a nurse and you’d better believe that if my coworkers and I were instructed to do things that consistently led to bad outcomes, we would speak up and demand change.

WTH?? You’re ok with accepting the failing state of education? I seriously have to question your integrity if you’re ok with continuing to operate this way. Jesus.

Calm down Drama Queen. The problem is this is also what’s taught in teaching programs. It’s been reading instruction for a LONG time. A lot of teachers honestly don’t know it’s not “the best” way to teach reading. I don’t teach elementary but you can also stop acting like teachers are killing children by using curriculum they learned on and are told to use by their district. By all means go lobby the district to abandon it and tell them what reading program you prefer.(you don’t know any.)

I don’t know which is worse, knowing the curriculum you follow is terrible yet choosing not to speak up, or being completely unaware that the curriculum is terrible in the first place. It means you’re either lazy or stupid.

Yes, there are many better options for the chosen curriculum. Many posters have linked specific examples. Children need to be taught to decode. Spelling, phonics, and grammar instruction are critical. A curriculum focused on building knowledge, rather than general comprehension strategies, is much more effective.

How do I, as a nurse, understand this better than you?!

The Calkins curriculum is not terrible. It works wonders for many students in helping them to think deeply and comprehend at advanced levels (granted, I’ve only taught Calkins in upper elementary grades). In the lower grades, it needs to be coupled with phonics instruction. A phonics only curriculum would bore the early readers to tears. My kids’ K-1 teachers (ACPS) did a good job balancing Calkins with phonics instruction. The dramatics of calling the curriculum “terrible” don’t help. What we had before (NO language arts curriculum for my first 12 years of teaching) was much worse. Each teacher had to create her own lessons based on the standards.—Fine, if you had an outstanding teacher, but not great in many cases.

THIS is the problem. We have educators that don’t understand how awful the LC curriculum is.

“It works wonders!” Um, why are kids so grossly underprepared for middle and high school then? Why are test scores getting worse and worse?

The only kids that are doing well are those that come from privileged homes. This is because their parents make sure they have the basic knowledge they need (they supplement at home or hire tutors). Not everyone can do this.

THIS is why the solution isn’t just handing more money over. When our “educators” don’t even understand the problem, we are in deep trouble.

Maybe the problem is not the curriculum, but that living in poverty makes academic success very difficult, regardless of the curriculum.

That's what research tells us, anyway, although it's ignored by everyone because it's much easier to blame schools for a problem they didn't cause than it is to address the real cause - poverty and inequity.

Also what my personal experience teaching for 30 years tells me.

Yet research shows that those kids living in poverty start to thrive when they are in a school that uses a content-rich curriculum! Go back and read previous posts. Using a better curriculum minimizes how much supplementation is needed, meaning it narrows the achievement gap between rich and poor kids.

I'm sorry, but that is completely incorrect. Research shows no such thing. The gap remains large regardless of the teaching and curriculum. Research even shows that when a program manages to change that trend, it is short-lived and usually involves tremendous resources (in terms of facilities, staffing, funding, and even teacher-participant energy) that it cannot reasonably be maintained long-term, or cannot be replicated.

Research does show that "good" instruction (which is not really agreed upon but generally means teachers well trained in best practices of the moment, with experience) is better than the alternatives, but it does not show that this can overcome external variables.

ATS has managed to close the achievement gap using the curriculum being advocated for on this thread.

[Anonymous]

I know what Wilson’s Fundations is. But what about Wilson Reading and Wit and Wisdom? Do these curriculums complement each other or do schools have to pick one or the other?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know what Wilson’s Fundations is. But what about Wilson Reading and Wit and Wisdom? Do these curriculums complement each other or do schools have to pick one or the other?

There are two components to reading: the first is decoding. Can you look at the words, know how to read them based on letter sounds and phonemic awareness. Can you read these words with fluency and accuracy. The second half of reading is comprehension: can you make MEANING of what you read *as you decode*? Wit and Wisdom deals more with teaching explicit skills to aid with comprehension. Fundations is focused on decoding and fluency first. It’s teaching kids the how to read; W&W comes later to teach them to read for comprehension and meaning and purpose.

[Anonymous]

I've read through this whole thread and can't find what sparked this conversation-- was there a recent change or decision by the superintendent that affects the curriculum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've read through this whole thread and can't find what sparked this conversation-- was there a recent change or decision by the superintendent that affects the curriculum?

No. Some people just clued in to what is being used in schools by another thread. It’s their new crusade. A nurse is in charge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know what Wilson’s Fundations is. But what about Wilson Reading and Wit and Wisdom? Do these curriculums complement each other or do schools have to pick one or the other?

There are two components to reading: the first is decoding. Can you look at the words, know how to read them based on letter sounds and phonemic awareness. Can you read these words with fluency and accuracy. The second half of reading is comprehension: can you make MEANING of what you read *as you decode*? Wit and Wisdom deals more with teaching explicit skills to aid with comprehension. Fundations is focused on decoding and fluency first. It’s teaching kids the how to read; W&W comes later to teach them to read for comprehension and meaning and purpose.

Thanks. This is useful. I have two questions:

1) My understanding is that in some APS schools like ATS, they use Wilson’s Fundations but then also Wilson Reading. My assumption was that Wilson’s Reading is for older kids. Is Wilson’s Reading just the same as Fundations?

2) Does any school in APS or any of the area public schools such as FCPS use Wit and Wisdom? I know that it is used in Baltimore because of some article I read but is it used anywhere in Northern Virginia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've read through this whole thread and can't find what sparked this conversation-- was there a recent change or decision by the superintendent that affects the curriculum?

No. Some people just clued in to what is being used in schools by another thread. It’s their new crusade. A nurse is in charge.

It started with the Spelling and Grammar thread. People on that thread then started talking about the reading curriculum. For some reason the Spelling and Grammar thread is less mean than this one.

[Anonymous]

Lucy Calkins is changing her tune on phonics right now BECAUSE states began declaring her "curriculum" a scam:

https://www.apmreports.org/story/2020/10/16/influential-literacy-expert-lucy-calkins-is-changing-her-views

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've read through this whole thread and can't find what sparked this conversation-- was there a recent change or decision by the superintendent that affects the curriculum?

No. Some people just clued in to what is being used in schools by another thread. It’s their new crusade. A nurse is in charge.

It started with the Spelling and Grammar thread. People on that thread then started talking about the reading curriculum. For some reason the Spelling and Grammar thread is less mean than this one.

I’m the nurse and didn’t start either thread. Oh how I wish I could be in charge!

[Anonymous]

It's not just phonics. All kids benefit from a content-rich ELA curriculum. Read The Knowledge Gap or any article by Natalie Wexler.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know what Wilson’s Fundations is. But what about Wilson Reading and Wit and Wisdom? Do these curriculums complement each other or do schools have to pick one or the other?

There are two components to reading: the first is decoding. Can you look at the words, know how to read them based on letter sounds and phonemic awareness. Can you read these words with fluency and accuracy. The second half of reading is comprehension: can you make MEANING of what you read *as you decode*? Wit and Wisdom deals more with teaching explicit skills to aid with comprehension. Fundations is focused on decoding and fluency first. It’s teaching kids the how to read; W&W comes later to teach them to read for comprehension and meaning and purpose.

Thanks. This is useful. I have two questions:

1) My understanding is that in some APS schools like ATS, they use Wilson’s Fundations but then also Wilson Reading. My assumption was that Wilson’s Reading is for older kids. Is Wilson’s Reading just the same as Fundations?

2) Does any school in APS or any of the area public schools such as FCPS use Wit and Wisdom? I know that it is used in Baltimore because of some article I read but is it used anywhere in Northern Virginia?

Not PP but does the Wilson tier 2 program complement wit and wisdom or do you pick one or the other? https://www.wilsonlanguage.com/programs/wilson-reading-system/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not just phonics. All kids benefit from a content-rich ELA curriculum. Read The Knowledge Gap or any article by Natalie Wexler.

This is why actual teachers are saying this is more complex than it looks. ALL kids will do better when they have relevant background knowledge to activate and apply to the text. Experiences, common knowledge, etc. So the curriculum has to reflect all kids cultural backgrounds appropriately which is why it needs to be diverse but of course this is another reason kids growing up in poverty tend not to do well: they lack books and exposure to these experiences and common knowledge ideas that give them that background knowledge which is a huge activator of understanding and attaching meaning to a text. Students in poverty also tend to be Black or Hispanic, and they are also least represented in a curriculum, reading or otherwise. They then don’t see themselves in the books and disengage and become harder to get back on track. Many teachers are white; they lack a true understanding of how to teach students who aren’t white and pinpoint Black and Hispanic students as behavior problems or having special needs. They get less reading instruction. It is really, REALLY multiplayers and is not as simple as “Lucy sucks and all teachers who use it suck.” You could change reading curriculum and it wouldn’t matter if you didn’t address the other stuff too.